Contesting sub-state integration policies: migrant new speakers as stakeholders in language regimes (original) (raw)
Related papers
Language policies and ‘new’ migration in officially bilingual areas
Current Issues in Language Planning, 2010
This paper explores the implications of new patterns of migration (temporary, circular) for national and regional language policies in officially bilingual areas. Contrasting urban and rural sites in the UK (Wales), Spain (Valencia) and Switzerland (Grisons), it examines the dominant discourses regarding ‘national’ (both in the formal state and contested regional sense of the word) languages and their role in the integration of immigrants. Furthermore, it shows how bi- or multi-lingual contexts in areas where two (or three) official languages already compete impact on migrants' expectations vis-à-vis language competences, attitudes towards local language learning and actual learning practices. It also investigates whether migrants' multi-lingual repertoires are taken into account for official language planning initiatives. In contrasting the dominant discourse about integration, governmental requirements and the existing language-learning provision with migrants' perspectives on their actual linguistic behaviour, we seek to determine alternative strategies for linguistic provision that may respond to new types of migration and might incorporate a more holistic, socio-cultural approach.
In this paper we juxtapose the European Union’s (EU’s) supranational policies on language and migration with their recontextualisation into national policies of the linguistic integration of migrants in two EU member states, Austria and Greece. The EU member states adapt the European legislation according to their national laws (National Acton Plans) which have to also account for national traditions and national citizenship legislation. Moreover, we explore the national regulations on language testing and the linguistic integration of migrants in Austria and Greece which are part and parcel of the National Action Plans and which establish obstacles for migrants: Indeed, they function as gate-keepers. Hence, a context-dependent micro-level discourse analytic approach suggests itself. The data for the analysis stem from legal and policy texts of the EU, Austria and Greece (regulations on citizenship, language education, testing and the linguistic integration ofmigrants). By employing the Discourse Historical Approach (DHA) of Critical Discourse Studies we analyze how specific EU regulations are implemented in national legislation; how migrants, who live in Austria and Greece are represented by the legislators, and finally how the respective national identities in the context of migration legislation are constructed.
Migrant Learners of Basque as New Speakers: Language Authenticity and Belonging
Languages, 2021
Language issues related to identity negotiation in minoritised language contexts, including those related to the category of “new speakers”, have often been studied in relation to local language dichotomies and national populations. This paper will examine identity construction among migrant learners of Basque from outside of Spain, looking at migrants as a diverse population and as a particular group of new speakers of Basque. By analysing the ways in which migrant learners position themselves as (not) belonging to “Basqueness” as a group identity, it points to the underlying language ideologies that guide language and identity categories, such as native Basque speakers or new speakers, within the essentialising and non-essentialising ideological influences. It will aim to answer how migrants employ identity categories or contest their use in discourse and establish the extent of the relation between perceived linguistic competence in Basque, the use of Basque by migrants and the i...
Language policy, in-migration and discursive debates in Wales
Drawing on theory from critical language policy literature, this article explores the impact of discourses on in-migration on Welsh language policy. By focussing on discursive debates surrounding the subject of in-migration, the article analyses how a range of actors produce and reproduce discourses on in-migration in Wales and how these discursive struggles impact on policy. It argues that, while certain actors have been able to construct a powerful discourse on in-migration through language debates, others have failed to make their voices heard and their views on the subject have been silenced. This unequal access to the production of discourse is not incidental; it is indicative of wider power structures at play within bilingual or multilingual language communities. Therefore, while the study focusses on Wales, the article highlights a theme that is relevant to all minoritized language groups, that of the interrelationship between policy, politics and power. It also stresses the importance of adopting an approach to language policy that takes into account both structure and agency alike, and confirms that language groups should not be conceptualised by number of speakers using categories such as ‘dominant’, ‘subordinate’, ‘majority’ and ‘minority’, but rather by issues of power and status.
National'languages in transnational contexts: Language, migration and citizenship in Europe
… , Policies and Practices: Language and the Future of …, 2006
Introduction: language, migration and anti-cosmopolitanism In the literature on language and nation, most notably perhaps in relation to German nationalisms, language is seen to be central both to the practical, instrumental processes of nationism (for example, in relation to citizenship) and to the symbolic, integrative processes of nationalism (for example, in relation to national identity): standard languages, in particular, are seen as both a vehicle for articulating and achieving common political goals and a manifestation of a common purpose and singular identity. While these processes are sometimes cast as political and ideological issues respectively, I want to argue that discourses of citizenship are not separate from, but rather subsumed in, discourses of national identity, and that recent public debates and national policies on the relationship between language and citizenship in several western European states are not merely issues of political 'management' but part of a larger ideological process and constitute a classic example of what Blommaert (1999) calls a language ideological debate. This process has, of course, to do with challenges to national sovereignty (in economic, political and cultural terms) in the context of social and political change in Europe and in particular in relation to perceived threats to national integrity posed by large-scale migration. The movement of people brings with it the movement of languages, and this arguably most salient item in the baggage of migrant individuals and groups confronts most immediately what Blommaert and Verschueren (1998: © Patrick Stevenson. Not for citation or distribution without permission of the author. 2 194-5) call the 'dogma of homogeneism': 'a view of society in which differences are seen as dangerous and centrifugal and in which the "best" society is suggested to be one without intergroup differences'. For, as the literature on language and nationalism has repeatedly shown, the fundamental paradox on which the dominant discourse in most European nation-states is still constructed is that these manifestly multilingual societies are conceived as essentially and irrevocably monolingual (cf Ingrid Gogolin's discussion of the 'monolingual habitus' of multilingual states: Gogolin 1994). Until relatively recently, these states have been able to maintain their dogma of linguistic homogeneity (whether or not they inscribe it in constitutional and other legal apparatus) through a combination of implicitly embedding the idea of a 'national language' in state institutions such as education and public employment and the unspoken recourse to established tradition and 'common sense'. Indigenous or longstanding ethnolinguistic minorities have been absorbed into this homogeneous political culture by granting limited linguistic rights on the one hand and promoting what Kymlicka (2001: 25) calls a 'societal culture' on the other: 'all liberal democracies', he argues, 'have encouraged citizens to view their life-chances as tied up with participation in common societal institutions that operate in [the 'national' language]'. But post-1989 large population movements have coincided with growing instability of beliefs in and understandings of 'national' integrity: for example, debates in the UK on regionalism, 'Englishness' and the popular image of the 'disunited kingdom'; the recent debates in Germany on multiculturalism and the concept of the Leitkultur; and ruptures in the political culture in Austria over social and ethnic inclusion. Governments of radically different colours in Germany and Austria (as well as, for example, the Netherlands) have reacted simultaneously by © Patrick Stevenson. Not for citation or distribution without permission of the author. 3 introducing new legal instruments to control the flow of migrants, which include strict rulings on proficiency in the 'national' language 1. It therefore no longer appears to me possible to regard the question of the relationship between language and citizenship exclusively as a matter of principle in liberal democracies. Rather we have to acknowledge the historicity of discourses on language and citizenship and analyse them in the context of the national histories of the states in which they occur. From this perspective, overtly political (nationist) activities may be revealed as tacitly ideological (nationalist) operations intended to salvage the integrity of the nation based on the myth of a stable monolingual norm that is increasingly at odds with, and under assault from, multilingual realities. For the denial of societal multilingualism underpins and reinforces discourses that reject the status of (particularly) Germany as an Einwanderungsland (country of immigration). For example, former President Richard von Weizsäcker's categorical assertion: 'By European standards we [i.e. Germany] are more or less a classic country of immigration' (Nach europäischen Maßstäben sind wir nahezu ein klassisches Einwanderungsland) (Weizsäcker 2001) echoes the insistence of the Süssmuth Commission on Migration that It is a fact that Germany has been a country of immigration for a long time. … The assertion that 'Germany is not a country of immigration' used to be a defining political principle but has become untenable as the cornerstone of migration and integration policy. (Zuwanderung gestalten-Integration fördern 2001: 1) Faktisch ist Deutschland seit langem eine Einwanderungsland. … Die in der Vergangenheit vertretene politische und normative Festlegung "Deutschland ist kein Einwanderungsland" ist als Maxime der Zuwanderungs-und Integrationspolitik unhaltbar geworden.
International Journal of Language & Law, 2021
Language policy forms an integral part of constructing, upholding, and contesting the status and social space of languages. Such policies may perpetuate social inequalities between speakers of different languages in multilingual societies (Tollefson, 1991; Van Dijk, 1993; Es-cobar Alméciga, 2013; Ready, 2018). Policies that typically address society as a whole may also reference language use of migrant populations. The current study analyzes integration policies in Spain at the federal and regional levels in the autonomous communities of Madrid and Catalonia, and examines how these policies shape and characterize the role of language practices as they relate to immigrants' participation in Spanish society. Drawing on Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, 1989), this study relies on intratextual and intertextual analyses to examine how discourse is produced and reproduced throughout national policy in comparison to policies of two of Spain's most populated autonomous communities with large immigrant populations. Findings indicate that-for both communities-integration through language education is considered a crucial aspect for active citizenship and maintaining social cohesion. However, while language education in Madrid refers to developing proficiency in Spanish, Catalan is central to Catalonia's language policies. In both cases, however, lack of competence in these languages is considered a major obstacle to integration and thus, social cohesion. Additionally, while migrant languages and cultures are emphasized as being important to interculturality and are referenced as having a role in integration, policies often fall short in their support for immigrant languages.
Assimilation Through Language Learning ? : Minoritised Language Perception and Integration Policies
2015
In this paper I will compare the official policies drawn by the Basque Government and the Basque Language Advisory Board with regards to Basque (or Euskera) and the integration of migrants in the Basque Autonomous Community (BAC) region of Spain, with migrant students’ perception of the role of this minoritised language. I will explore the relationship between the migrant students’ attitudes towards Basque and the language ideologies that shape them. I will use a content-based discourse approach to analyse my data. Such a comparison will show how attitudes are constructed in discourse within a specific context. It will also allow me to consider the extent to which the development of positive and negative attitudes by migrants is related to the official stance on the role of Basque in integration.
Western Europe has experienced a paradigm shift over the last decades in its migration and integration policies. With the changing faces of its migrant population and an increasing trend towards right-wing politics, a variety of Western European states have tightened their immigration policies and introduced punitive integration measures. While the degree of coercion and the practical implementation of the policies differ from state to state, they share a focus on the regimented acquisition of the local language by the migrant population, giving rise to specific language policies related to the integration of migrants (Extra et al. 2009; Freeman 2004 ; Hogan-Brun et al. 2009 ; Pochon-Berger and Lenz 2014 ). Social scientists and sociolinguists alike have criticized this trend on the basis of interpreting the function of such measures as primarily one of migration control. As part and parcel of these migrant language policies, language testing has emerged as particularly effective and has been implemented at various moments and sites of the immigration process, starting at the preentry stage for family reunification (e.g. in Austria or the Netherlands), continuing on with obligatory participation in language or integration courses for the renewal of temporary or permanent permits (e.g. in Germany or Switzerland) and, finally, for naturalization and citizenship. While integration programmes focusing on the transmission of language competences are usually presented as supportive of the integration of the immigrant population, they have rather turned out to serve ‘a no-immigration policy’ (Joppke 2007 , p. 250), deterring potential immigrants from entering the state in question, settling down and applying for its citizenship through the introduction of various language testing regimes. In view of these recent but fundamental changes, it is the aim of this chapter to empirically unpack and dissect the hegemonic discourse that is based on the common-sensical (as referring to Gramsci 1971 ) notion of language as the key to integration (Mateos 2009 ; Plutzar 2010 ; Plutzar 2013) and, in turn, forms the premise on which the language policies reside. In this discursive order, it is stipulated that competences in the local language are conducive to the integration of migrants, which is why the participation in language courses needs to be promoted and can/should equally be demanded. Drawing on a larger study (Flubacher 2013 ; Flubacher 2014 ), I will present a critical discursive analysis of these migrant language policies in order to address following empirical questions: (1) Under which conditions and in which materialization has the discourse ‘integration through language’ emerged in Switzerland and in the Canton of Basel-Stadt (henceforth: Basel)?; (2) In which form did this discourse develop?; and (3) How do actors position themselves within this order of discourse? In order to answer these questions, particular attention will be paid to the Federal Law on the Foreign Population and to the cantonal Law on Integration of Basel in the time span of 1998–2008. Furthermore, it will be of particular interest how actors in the field of integration and immigration policies in Basel make sense of this discourse and the policies, how they position themselves and, finally, if they perceive any room for manoeuvre regarding their own practices. This analysis will bring to the fore the positions that are possible in the discursive order of ‘integration through language’, thus highlighting how it shapes and structures the sociopolitical practices in the field of integration. Finally, I argue that it is the role of researchers to propose critical and empirical analyses of seemingly neutral language policies in embedding them in their genealogy, pointing out erasures as well as consequences in order to launch a broader debate.